HAPPENING: Muslim Ban appealed to the SCOTUS

This'll be a moment of truth. We'll see if Gorsuch is just another cuck.

There is literally no reason this doesn't get approved. I can't fucking wait for the salt.

Kek's here. Praise

>>128090041
We can only hope for now.

File: itsrubio.jpg (55KB, 1280x620px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 1280x620px

>>128090444

Party Line Vote, then?

>>128090444
checked

>>128090444
14th amendment says equal protection under the law.

>>128090925
The 14th amendment doesn't apply to the fucking Globe retard. American citizens.

>>128090925
> Citizens of another nation
> Protected class

Pick one.

>>128090566

there's literally no argument against it. its a power granted to Trump by the constitution

>>128091027
but anon, we're all citizens of the world! borders are illusory!

>>128090041
It won't happen. the original ban was for 90 days just so they "could update the immigration system". It's now been 120 days? It was clearly an excuse just to ban Muslims indefinitely and the supreme Court isnt going to be fooled by it.

>>128091325
>Implying banning muslims is a bad thing

>>128090041
I bet Roberts caves again and they strike it down and effectively prevent and immigration controls from ever being implemented again

>>128090041
The president clearly has the authority in USC 1182 (f). No question about it, supreme Court will rule in trump admins favor. Get them banning memes ready.

>>128091027
Wrong, SCOTUS jurisprudence has extended Due Process to Foreign Nationals in a variety of circumstances that are outside the US. In fact, Kennedy was in on one of those decision.

>>128091027
>>128091070
nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Notice how it says any person. That means you cant kick out someone solely because they are Muslim.

>>128091027
Actually the language kind of does, which was illuminated during the Sally Yates testimony

>>128090041
Good early test of Gorsuch I think
It will tell Trump what direction he needs to go in for future appointments

man if this gets appealed... imagine all of the literal shaking

>>128091537
No it doesn't. If you aren't a citizen of this country you aren't entitled to anything but a deportation

>>128091528
It's the "country of origin"clause that got this ban stopped. The judge was incorrect however, as the ban is clearly on countries of current residence, not origin.

>>128090444
SHADILAY

Travel ban will be instated later this year.

>>128091325
Thats not how the system works. Lower court's decision now sets a precedent of limited presidential power on matters of immigration. Two parts of INA are in conflict. SCOTUS will now decide if the lower courts decision is right or wrong. Initial duration of the ban is irrelevant

>>128091528
Too bad the law doesn't state Muslim or any religion for that matter.

>>128090041
This is a test for Gorsuch. If he votes against Trump, then Dr. President knows to go further to the right with his next appointed judge.

>>128090041
And it should because this is entirely legal and the reasons for blocking it are clearly activist

>yeah it's not illegal but we are implying that the intent is racist therefore blocked

Absolute flagrant abuse of judicial power these federal judges should be impeached and removed from the bench

>>128091528
Is this a new shill tactic?

>Kick Muslims out
The ban is to prevent them from coming here.

The amendments do not apply to foreign people that are not on US soil. How hard is this?

>>128091459
I'm not implying anything. I'm saying that's the veil the trump administration used to ban Muslims and the court system isn't so stupid which is why it failed to pass at the very first hurdle. I'll be surprised if the supreme Court even takes a look at it and doesn't just tell him no

>>128091651
The only ones doing the literal shaking will be /pol/ when it rules Trump can't implement his clearly racist travel ban.

>>128091517
Well, time to fuck the jurisprudence.

File: Screenshot_31.png (9KB, 635x191px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 635x191px

>>128091517
A person who isn't currently in the country and never has been isn't a foreign national.

>>128090041
IT. IS. NOT. A. MUSLIM. BAN.

GET A CLUE, RETARD.

It will be overruled in Trumps favor in a vote along party lines.

Trump will be vindicated, and he should decide to expand and keep the ban indefinitely since why the fuck not

>>128090266
>>128090444
>>128090544
>>128090566


Eery

>>128091882
USC 1182 (f)

Go fucking read it

The President HAS the authority.

>>128091528
>within its jurisdiction
how are citizens of a different country that are living outside of US are within US jurisdiction?

>>128091325
The 9th told trump he couldn't update the system either cause "DAS RASSIST". So he can still call for the ban based on this.

>>128092203
5-4 ruling in favor of the Trump admin

Check it.

>>128090041
>muslim ban
You are fake news.

It is a ban on terrorist countries with dysfunctional governments that we cannot verify documentation from.

>>128091882
The vast majority of Muslims are from countries not on the list. Can't call it a Muslim ban when the vast majority of them worldwide aren't affected by it at all.

>>128091913
let me guess? you also thought he wouldn't pull the trigger on getting us out of the Paris Accord?

Majority of SCOTUS will side with reason, and reason leans with TRUMP on this one, pal.

>>128092368
9-0 ruling in favor of Trump admin

File: 1484097295463.gif (3MB, 220x242px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 220x242px

>>128090444
>>128090041
It's gonna be election day all over again. I can't wait for CNN, MSNBC, and CBS to show sad pictures of Muslims crying.

>>128092230
They aren't. Some of these posts have to be b8 or a severe case of retardation.

>>128090041
Kennedy will sink this. Kennedy has been cucking harder and harder over the years, and that's going to be just as true this time. You think if he can fabricate a right to homobutt sex marriage, he can't fabricate a right for non-american citizens not to be discriminated against based on possible religious purposes?

hell, I'm more worried this doesn't backfire with the SCOTUS striking down borders and legalizing unlimited immigration at this point.

>>128092546
pfft we don't have to go all the way back to election night
it will be exactly what it was today, but cept more snowflakes crying the streets

>>128090041
The ban as it's written is 100% constitutional. If it's shot down, it's pure kikery.
The lower courts need a purge, they're obviously infested by obamas filth still.

>>128092368
I'm going to throw caution to the wind and say 6-3 Trump's favor.

When will we get a decision?

Replying to general comments on here... First, foreign nationals do have Due Process protection in certain situations. Here's a law rev. article that simplifies it a bit for those who haven't gone to law school. http://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4977&context=flr

Next, Trump has to get into the 1% of cases yearly that make it into the SCOTUS grants of cert. THIS IS NOT EASY! Even Pres. Obama had issues with this. The reason? If there's no circuit split and the jurisprudence is clear and stable enough not to warrant change, then you probably won't get a review; however, in cases of serious injustice they will grant cert. but it will be a summary opinion. Even if he does get before them, you need to realize that in these cases Dems have a slight upper leg. Why? Kennedy has been in on a variety of DPC decisions with for. nationals, and he has ruled in their favor. (This includes his circuit court seat and SCOTUS seat)

Finally, do I agree with the Pres. decision? He could have had a better law draft the decision and could have set it up differently. THIS CAN BE MADE CONSTITUTIONAL! He just needs to stop not banning countries he does business with and needs to blur a few of the discriminatory effects.

Sauce: I'm a lawyer at Pittman.

File: poiple.jpg (9KB, 186x271px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 186x271px

>>128090266
>>128090444
>>128090544
>>128090566
>>128092488
>>128092699
>all these fucking digits.

Is kek actually here?

File: b58464653.jpg (36KB, 429x516px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 429x516px

>>128091528
>>128091027
>>128091070
Ya'll are clearly ignorant of the 4th District's ruling. The said nothing about the rights of foreigners. The said that because the ban targeted Muslim countries, and because of Trump's campaign statements, this created "animus" toward Muslim AMERICANS and thus was a violation of the first amendment.

Shit logic, but you can never trust lawyers. We might get cucked.

>>128092773
Decision on temporary restraining order - probably within a week.
Full review by the court? End of the year

>>128091882
>why it failed to pass the first hurdle
It's called the ninth circus for a reason.

File: 14661525058360.png (160KB, 2600x2472px) Image search: [Google]

160KB, 2600x2472px

>>128090266
>>128090444
Czechekd, Libcucks lose the Climate treaty and the immigration ban is upheld.

>>128090041

The only question is, why is Trump being so based all of a sudden?

It's like he went from being a Jew shill for the past two months, to waking up on Wednesday and saying "fuck it, lets go salt mining." First he tears up the (((Paris Agreement))) and now, to top it off, he's banning Muslims again.

It's great, but I am truly confused.

>>128093177
His foreign trip redpilled him again.

>>128091078
They are trying to say that because Trump once said he wanted a Muslim Ban that therefore this is a Muslim Ban even though it doesn't ban only Muslims or most Muslims.

I want to own the gold in Fort Knox therefore I must be trying to rob the place...

Those outside the Jurisdiction of the US have no constitutional rights, but those with previously issued expired Visas may be construed to be within the Jurisdiction of the US.

Also they are saying a Muslim ban violates the religious freedom of employers to hire Muslims from abroad since foreigners themselves outside the US jurisdiction have no constitutional rights themselves.

Religious freedom to pay for labor when other labor will do..

What if a corporation or is against paying minimum wage on religious grounds, or following any other law? There has to be a sensible balance.

File: ap_16281543448823_sq-74c27401fb2b836f4ef15bebc30939a50844cb2e-s300-c85.jpg (21KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 300x300px

One step closer to the left's implosion.
All according to plan

>>128093316

I guess being around a bunch of smelly Muslims and Jews for a week can do that to a man.

File: 4362.png (295KB, 1250x500px) Image search: [Google]

295KB, 1250x500px

I can't wait until the Supreme Court puts all the worthless, Democrat-appointed district and Court of Appeals judges permanently in their place on this.

Trump needs to force Kennedy into retirement and force through a solid replacement so that there's no chance of a (((swing))) vote

>>128092507
Can you even imagine the ass pain if RBG sides with Le binthfpthurt

funny thing is the original ban would have been over by now.

but now? it's about sending a message.

>>128091517
There is a 1980s scotus case affirming that foreign nationals outside the Jurisdiction of the US have no constitutional rights.

A prior relationship with the US may place them in the Jurisdiction of the US however

>>128093632

I do not understand why Trump hasn't sent her camping yet.

>>128090041
If they don't, it's the end of America.

>>128093496
once it's upheld, the left will look like Jonestown.

>>128090041
trump will get his ass handed to him

File: circuit_map_in_agency_palette-full-size.png (98KB, 712x480px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 712x480px

We absolutely sure about SCOTUS?

Why did the 4th circuit uphold it?

FUCK YEA

>>128093177
Probably because kike media doesn't stop. Time to go full shitlord and trigger leftcucks

It's never going to happen, guys.

Trump is finished. Confgege or whatever.

>>128093742
Dude can't even eat ice cream without the media's magnifying glass glaring over him.

>>128093177
>all of a sudden
He's always been, your shaky faith is a sign of spinelessness. A world leader has to play the game still, he can't just tell everybody to fuck off all the time.

>>128090041
Gorsuch better pull through. I didn't spend long nights memeing for the SC to turn this away let alone rule against us.

>>128091494
>Get them banning memes ready.
Yes!
When will they actually hear the case, though?

File: 1455258136956.gif (3MB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 500x500px

>>128090041
Either way the streets will be flooded with tears! Can't wait to troll the fuck out of whoever loses.

>>128090444
There's literally no reason affirmative action should be legal, and yet the court upheld that. And even for shit like the upholding of the 2nd amendment with DC v Heller, it still barely eeked by 5-4. That means 4/9 judges are willing to completely ignore the constitution and the 2nd amendment, which is clear as day. That's fucking scary.

There is no reason the muslim ban should be ruled unconstitutional. The law says the President has the right to deny entry of any group he wants. People bring up "muh freedom of religion" but the first amendment doesn't apply to somalis and syrians over in their shithole nations. It means equal treatment for those here. NOT those who are trying to come here.

That said... I don't have good confident. We have Gorsuch now, but he's just a replacement for based Scalia. So the court is still 4 conservatives, 4 libshits, and 1 fence-sitter. It could pass, but if they decide to rule against it, it would set a terrible precedent.

>>128093901
See >>128092956

>>128092946
i'll flip a quarter, heads yes tails no, brb

it was tails

>>128091494
>Get them banning memes ready.
This isn't the Hillary timeline.

>>128093901
Obamas lackeys are playing activist.

>>128091462
I bet Roberts, Kennedy, AND Gorsuch are gonna cave.

>>128093901
>Why did the 4th circuit uphold it?
Obama stacked it to hell and back with (((impartial))) appointees

>>128091807
>Absolute flagrant abuse of judicial power
100%
The scary thing is so many experts, and maybe even the judges themselves, don't realize how far off base they are.

He's within his legal authority to do it, the judges blocking it are literally abusing their power knowingly

>>128092368
Should be 9-0. Dissenting opinion would be too embarrassing to have your name on but one of these shameless communist kikes will shill until they're just dusty bones.

>>128091537
thats not what she said, but she did cite some possibly legitimate US code, but I've never heard it anywhere else and it contradicts the code that Trump has cited to justify it so idk

>>128091494
>>128092209

Here it is, USC 1182 (f):

Suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by President

Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate. Whenever the Attorney General finds that a commercial airline has failed to comply with regulations of the Attorney General relating to requirements of airlines for the detection of fraudulent documents used by passengers traveling to the United States (including the training of personnel in such detection), the Attorney General may suspend the entry of some or all aliens transported to the United States by such airline.

jew bastard-life long liberal-Hillary supporting-Harvard law for 50 years-pedo-Dershowitz has said all along that SCOTUS will uphold the Travel Ban... so I trust he knows more than shit posting shills on /pol/

>>128091797
I'm not worried about Gorsuch I'm worried about the swing judge who might potentially be the tiebreaker

>>128094271
>first amendment doesn't apply to somalis and syrians over in their shithole nations. It means equal treatment for those here. NOT those who are trying to come here.

You don't understand how your own constitution works. The first amendment doesn't "apply" to citizens. It applies to the US government - the first amendment forbid the government from discriminating against people based on their religion. The US government cannot fuck with religious freedom on American soil or elsewhere, no matter whom they are fucking with - citizens or no. The amendments guarantee rights for people by restricting what the federal government can do. That is what it means.

>>128094844
yeah Gorsuch is as safe a vote for a thumbs up as Ginsburg is for a thumbs down

File: 1496362099102.png (5KB, 405x427px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 405x427px

>>128090041
>the supreme court will rule in favor of the travel ban

File: trump muslim ban.jpg (208KB, 847x1045px) Image search: [Google]

208KB, 847x1045px

>>128094611
The problem is that, despite our system of checks and balances, we have absolutely NO CHECKS against activist judges who decide to completely ignore the constitution and/or use pilpul talmudic bullshit to argue that it totally says the exact opposite of what it says.

Look at last year's ruling on affirmative action. It was upheld, despite us nominally having laws that say you can't treat people differently based on race (these laws are only ever used against whites, but that's apparently okay). And you can look at each justice's argument for why they decided to uphold/reject. Sotomayor, the marxist latinx piece of shit, literally wrote an argument that basically just said "well I got to be a judge and a SCOTUS justice because of affirmative action, so I think it should stay". That was literally her entire fucking argument.

these people all need to be hanged from a short rope.

>>128094887
>discriminating against people
not people. Citizens.
Anyways, the ban is clearly not a Muslim ban. Iran even got off the list.

>>128091462
Then it will be time to wipe out some cucks.

File: rs-heavens-gate-cult-suicide-v1-d83f062d-4dd7-4512-b18d-8193f78063b4.jpg (32KB, 480x299px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 480x299px

>>128093813
I'm thinking more Heavens Gate

>>128094887
>Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances

Banning muslims from entry isn't prohibiting the free exercise of islam by those muslims who are already citizens, you fucking leaf.

>>128094844
Do you mean Anthony Kennedy?
Apparently, he's a """libertarian""" which is why he has "progressive" social views and tended to side with the liberals on the more recent SC cases.

>>128091494
>>128094789
This. Support for the ban is already codified in US law and USC 1182(f) has already been upheld by the SCOTUS in previous cases, so there's judicial precedent for upholding the current ban.

The law clearly states that decisions on the entry of aliens are well within the President's purview, and since the ban is based on countries, not specific ethnic or religious groups, there's no constitutional violation.

I put odds at 10:1 against the SCOTUS holding up the lower court decision.

>>128090444
its been over 90 days, can't trump just follow through with the plan that comes after a 90 day muslim ban? What is that plan?

>>128090041
This was the point.

>>128095100

>Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.[1]

It says people. Not "citizens". It has nothing to do with citizenry or lack thereof - it has to do with limiting the federal government's power permanently.

The second amendment also says 'people' have the right to bear arms, not just 'citizens'. Case law supports this.

>>128095006
>>128094844
((Breyer)), ((Ginsburg)), ((Kagan)), and "Spicy Latinx" Sotomayor are all 100% going to strike it down as unconstitutional, regardless of what the constitution actually says.

It all comes down to Kennedy. Which makes me nervous as fuck, because he said yes to that fag marriage bullshit.

>>128094887
It doesn't say that. It says "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." meaning we will not make laws imposing a state religion, or laws banning the practice of a religion. It says nothing about not allowing people into the country. Banning Muslims from entering would not be imposing a law on people already here.

>>128095333
Are you a judge? Because a federal one agrees with me and ruled just that.

>>128093901
>Why did the 4th circuit uphold it?

Because Obama hated the 4th circuit, so he expanded the number of seats on the 4th circuit, and then rammed through radical leftist nominees to fill every newly created vacancy, turning it into a shit show to rival the 9th when, prior to that nigger's meddling, it was home to a lot of very sound jurisprudence.

File: 1368151426121.gif (2MB, 336x167px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 336x167px

>>128090041

wew lmao

File: 1484967854172.jpg (32KB, 470x400px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 470x400px

>>128090041
The U.S is becoming a bigger joke by the day.

Proving checks and balances is a fucking farce.

>>128095609
I'm surprised at how you Americans don't understand your own constitution. If it said what you think it does, the judge could not have made the ruling he did. Banning muslims due to being muslim is a clear violation of the first amendment.

>>128095594
Won't Ginsburg be pressured to recuse herself?

>>128095618
Literally not an argument. We've already established that judicial activism is a thing, and a federal judge can make up any excuse he wants for why he thinks something is unconstitutional. And the only recourse is to go to a higher court and try again.

The first amendment doesn't say jack fucking shit about this country not being allowed to decide who's allowed in.

>>128095559
Its "the people" as in "the American people", not "people of earth" retard

>>128095462
It will be very interesting to see which of the leftists on the Court are so fucking careless of real law that they vote against the travel ban.

>>128095779
Democrats have a history of appointing judges who answer to the party before the constitution.
A lot of Klansman were made judges because of the democrats.

>>128095779
leaf can you read anything besides a headline without a buzzword? it's not a Muslim ban.
last I checked muslims from Egypt, Paki, SA (which they shouldn't be allowed SA should be on the list) etc can come on through

Not a single justice will vote against it. It would be extremely embarrassing for their careers as this is very specifically allowed for Trump in the constitution. The president can ban any group of aliens for ANY REASON.

>>128095559
>it has to do with limiting the federal government's power permanently
You can't really say "it has to do" with that, when that was in no way whatsoever what the founders intended it to mean. You're just talking about how people have warped it over the years, not really something that's actually in the 1st amendment.

>>128095779
> If it said what you think it does, the judge could not have made the ruling he did
Post a picture of your nose, shlomo. This is the most disingenous talmudic argumentation I've seen in quite some time.

>Banning muslims due to being muslim is a clear violation of the first amendment.
Banning foreign muslims on foreign soil from entry into America does not violate the first amendment. In no way is this ruling suppressing anyone's freedom to practice religion.

>>128095941
the one anon nailed it. it's going to be a 5-4 decision, just a matter of kennedy.
I trust he'll see that the travel ban is completely constitutional and it will be upheld

>>128093901
We need to split 9 into 2 circuits I hate being held hostage by commie California fuckboi judges

File: maximum_laughter.jpg (345KB, 680x750px) Image search: [Google]

345KB, 680x750px

>>128095022
I needed to check if it was true, so I googled her, and it even says so on the first paragraph of her law school section on her wikipedia page.
>Sotomayor entered Princeton University on a full scholarship, by her own later description gaining admission in part due to her achievements in high school and in part because affirmative action made up for her standardized test scores not being fully comparable to those of other applicants. She would later say that there are cultural biases built into such testing and praise affirmative action for fulfilling "its purpose: to create the conditions whereby students from disadvantaged backgrounds could be brought to the starting line of a race many were unaware was even being run."
I couldn't believe it. This is a "reasonable argument" in today's Supreme Court.
I dunno whether to laugh or feel bad, that's shameful to what's supposed to be the ultimate judgment in America.

>>128095779
>If it said what you think it does, the judge could not have made the ruling he did.
>thinking that a judge could never rule incorrectly

>>128095809

That's like asking whether (((Kagan))) would recuse herself from Obamacare when she was obviously biased, having acted as Obama's lawyer on it.

The answer is no, because they are there to do one thing only, advance the interests of the Democrat party.

>>128090444
confirmed

>>128095952
>southern strategy never happened
Trumpfags are retarded

>>128096246
That's the issue. There's no accountability. If a justice wanted to, she could just take a shit on a piece of paper and smear a :^) emoji and submit that into official record. And there's nothing anyone could do about it. None of them actually NEED to make any arguments, because they answer to no one.

When it comes right down to it, we have an oligarchy of 9 who get to decide whatever they want, and we have to trust that they'll actually base their decisions off the constitution. But as you can see, they fucking don't. The good ones like Scalia and Thomas and the other conservative judges do, but the marxist kikes on the court just pretend that the constitution is a "living document" (read: can be interpreted however we want for maximum convenience, goy!)

>>128096069
why do you want a 90 day ban when its already been over 100 days since they rewrote the? 1st order

>>128095779
>If it said what you think it does, the judge could not have made the ruling he did.
All laws restricting the acquisition/transfer/transport of weapons of any kind are unconstitutional, and yet many such laws exist.

>>128096161
I think it's going to go 7-2 in the Trump administration's favor, don't know which 2 although I guess that little drunken shriveled jew woman will be one of them

File: PRAISE HIM!.jpg (1MB, 1600x900px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1600x900px

>>128090566
>>128090544
>>128090444
>>128090266
SO LET IT BE WRITTEN, SO LET IT BE DONE.THE SALT MUST FLOW.

File: 1476701712708m.jpg (138KB, 1024x761px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 1024x761px

>>128093742
It's almost impossible to get rid of a SCJ. God willing the stress does her in. I've been praying for this traitorous cunt to choke on a matza ball for years.

>>128096765
I want the #PermaBan

>>128096810
I don't think you realize how fucking polarized the court is. There are 3 communist jews and a beaner, and they ALWAYS side with whatever the leftist position is, no matter what. You really think at least 2/4 of these pieces of shit are going to rule in favor of the ban? No fucking way.

I'm telling you, it all comes down to swing voter Kennedy.

>>128097137
So terrorists states like saudi arabia get a free pass with your ban?

>>128090444
>There is literally no reason this doesn't get approved. I can't fucking wait for the salt.

CZECH'D THE FUCK OUT OF THOSE DIGITS!

Scalia didn't die in vain.

File: Fukkin saved.jpg (51KB, 750x563px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 750x563px

I believe in it.Lets BTFO the libshits once again, boys! Lets make them cry tears of salt and cries of "IMPEACHHHHH TRAITOR" Lets obliterate them all.

Those scumbags are only good for destruction - time to end them effectively

>>128092665
He upheld gun rights
Just because he upheld fag marriage doesnt mean hes compromised

>>128097069
The silver lining is that a lot of these justices are old as fuck. Ginskike is a decrepit mummy. Breyer and Kennedy are also pushing ~80. They should all conceivably either have to retire or croak during the next 8 years. Not to mention guys like Clarence Thomas want to retire, meaning he'll be replaced with fresh blood.

If everything goes properly, by the end of Trump's terms in office, SCOTUS should be stacked with fairly young conservative judges, 7-2 with only Kagan and Sotomayor being left.

That said, precedent is huge in the justice system. If they say the muzzie ban is unconstitutional now, shit is fucked.

>>128097633
>>128097655
AAAHHHHHHHHH The ghost of Scalia shall be avenged!

>>128097207
protip: the beaner is also a Jew.

>>128097207
>and they ALWAYS side with whatever the leftist position is, no matter what
That's not true.
>You really think at least 2/4 of these pieces of shit are going to rule in favor of the ban?
Yes, I *think* so. We'll see.

>>128097675
gun rights is one thing, dude. Think about all the mental gymnastics you need to pull in order to argue that fag marriage is a constitutional right, rather than something that's in the jurisdiction of the individual states.

He's a fucking cuck. I seriously don't know which way he'll rule on this. I'm nervous as fuck.

>>128097822
Show me a major case where one of these marxists (breyer, kagan, ginsburg, sotomayor) didn't rule in favor of whatever the leftist party line was. I'm actually genuinely curious, but I don't actually know of any times they haven't done exactly what the DNC told them to do.

>>128097819
Seriously? Wouldn't surprise me at all, but my cohencidence detector doesn't echo Sotomayor.

>>128091528
they are not even inside the country yet fag, they're not under US jurisdiction in fucking Syria

>>128090041
and it will be overturned again
its a never ending cycle of Trump being reminded he has no power

>>128092956
they literally said there was nothing illegal in the law, but the motivations they think are behind it hurt their feelings so it's illegal

>liberal judge education

>>128097722
>>128097822
>>128097655
>>128097633
>>128096911
>>128096111
>>128095757
>>128095333
>>128095100
>>128095022
>>128094844
>>128094611
>>128094400
>>128094155
>>128093177
>>128092988
>>128092699
>>128092488
>>128090566
>>128090444
>>128090266
Guys i think we may have created a Kek philosopher stone..

>>128098241
overturned by whom this is SCOTUS the buck stops there.
it's blood in bloodout

SCOTUS would have to overturn it themselves -or- 3/4 of states would have to and that is a mess and lengthy process that will not happen in this case

Everyone quoting the constitution is missing the important fact that this applies to Muslims not people.

>>128098042
>>128097819
Pretty sure she's a Catholic, although with how cucked Catholicism is nowadays, it's close enough.

He should have added N korea to list, and some other random dinky country. 5 to 4. I'm not sure why the argument isn't being made this is = to letting Nazi's into US in 1945. If we ever have a war, technically the other country should send combat troops over w visas instead of ships. Leaves country exposed insane precedent to set for future.

>>128095559
The people, as in "We, the People of the United States".

'The people' has been understood to refer to US citizens and residents for 220 years.

>>128098891
>christcucks
>jews

What's the difference?

>>128098042
Sotomayor is a normal Spanish name as far as I can tell, but her mother's maiden name was Baez, which is often a crypto name. She's not confirmed and likely never will be because her mother was an orphan, but there's a distinct possibility.

Either way, she sure acts like a kike.

>>128095779
>Banning muslims due to being muslim is a clear violation of the first amendment.
No, no it isn't.
The constitution grants complete control of immigration to the executive.

File: 1495931948431.jpg (45KB, 768x513px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 768x513px

Timeline A: Travel ban upheld, much Democrat tears.

Timeline B: Travel ban struck down, much Republican anger, Hero Cruz rises and introduces legislation to repeal Hart-Celler, passes both chambers after a failed filibuster attempt, many Democrat tears.

>>128099321
well, that and it's not a ban on Muslims for being Muslim.
It's a travel ban on specific areas.

If Muslims from Egypt, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia can come on thru, how can it be a Muslim ban?

>>128097207
Polarized or not - even for a leftist judge it's a stretch to rule AGAINST codified US law that's been supported in multiple SCOTUS cases and been applied by 5 of the last 6 presidents without being ruled a constitutional violation.

Why are Democrats against the countries on the ban list? We are doing them a favor, fix your shit and then you can come here. How hard is this?

>>128090444
Hmm it's iffy. It'll be 4-5 no matter what, but a conservative justice may flip based on the Guantanamo argument.
Of course if they do that sets a really really horrible precedent for things to come so I doubt they would.

this man is trying to destroy all we achieved in the last 8 years

mad af ngl

>>128099521
Even if it was a muslim ban I'd argue it would be constitutional.

If the US wanted to ban foreign bald people from entering it should be fine so long as we don't punish the bald people already here. If we wanted to ban immigration from group X it should be fine so long as those of group X that are already here are not penalized.

Think Chinese Exclusion Act.

>>128096810
Kegels and the foreigner.

>>128098042
>Show me a major case
Oh it's gotta be a major case? That wasn't stated originally. I don't really know enough to cite cases. I just know the Court frequently votes unanimously, or only 1 or 2 justices go one way.

>>128090041
Will they hear the case though?

>>128099260
Interesting. Looking at her, she DOES look fairly kikey. I've had to work with many kikes that have a similar looking phenotype. But she's also a latinx, and my jewdar isn't calibrated to see the differences between kikes and BLANDA UPP mystery meat hispanics.
Honorary kike, at the very least.

>>128099533
>without being ruled a constitutional violation.
As ruled by whom? Themselves? See the problem here? There's no accountability with SCOTUS. The idea that they need to base their rulings on the constitution is a fucking FARCE. Many actually do their job, but others like Ginsburg and Sotomayor just do whatever the hell they want. And there's no system in place to balance this power.

>>128098241
Actually Trump is well within his power to issue the ban. The activist judges in the lower courts have over stepped their bounds. The supreme court should vote in Trumps favor.

Kennedy won't vote for it

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arizona_v._United_States

>>128098375
digits up the wazoo

>>128099533
they gon do it anyway, I know how this shit works, my courts are even shittier

we even have a book were one of our former justices admitted he ruled against the then-president even though he thought he did nothing wrong, because some newspaper said he was gonna vote in favor of him and he didn't wanna look bad

>>128090444
checked keked and praised kek

File: 43615d4b4a0bede8de02e2b3aea02e3396e6037c22bf47ba0d6babd518f6bc5f.jpg (150KB, 960x960px) Image search: [Google]

150KB, 960x960px

>>128090041
The muslims...

>>128100131
But that supports the opposite side.
That the Feds, and Feds alone, have control over immigration.

>>128099260
>there's no evidence
>no reason whatsoever to believe sotomayor is a jew
>it's a possibility
>let's treat it as reality

>>128090041
The lower courts both came down against.
SCOTUS will punt it back down.

>>128090041
basically Covfefe House says: time to pay up, Neil.

File: trump two scoops.jpg (29KB, 341x247px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 341x247px

>>128099521
There are two layers to the argument:

1) Whether or not a ban based on religion is constitutional
2) Whether Trump's executive order constitutions a ban based on religion.

I think #2 is clearly not true. It's not a blanket ban on muslims. Muslims are never mentioned in the EO. Not all muslim nations are banned, and in the nations that are banned, the christian minorities can't come in either.

My issue is that the argument shouldn't even need to come down to #2, because there's nothing unconstitutional about a muslim ban. People keep talking about "muh freedom of religion" but banning muslims isn't preventing the practice of islam in america. It's not saying they can't practice it. It's just saying that we're no longer accepting any more muslims. Some somali pirate doesn't have first amendment rights.

ALSO, if scotus strikes down the travel ban, I hope Trump doubles down and just puts a complete shutdown on all immigration/visas/greencards, period.
"okay, you want to strike down my original ban for not being equal? Fine, everyone is now equally banned immigrating here. Don't dare fucking complain, because you're the reason I had to make it more broad. "

Just wanted to let you all know that they get about 7000 case requests a year and they only hear 80 of them

>>128100129
>should
SHOULD. Half of SCOTUS are activist kike judges too.
It'll be either 5-4 or 4-5, all depending on Kennedy.

>>128100599
Yes, but most cases are no-name ones that are nowhere near as high-profile as this.
That said, they might reject. SCOTUS has this bullshit where they're afraid to rule on certain things and create a precedent. That's why there hasn't ever actually been a ruling on anchor babies, for example.

>>128100599
They're definitely gonna hear this one. It's so controversial & important and I'm sure at least half the justices think the lower court fucked up completely on this.

Trumps EO will be upheld. The reasoning behind the left wing judges is not based in law. Even the liberal Justices know all their power is gone too if precedent isn't upheld. Obama literally did the same thing with Iraq a few years before. None of the countries on travel pause list have embassies or they are on terrorist lists...Easy call...Great campaign issue for Trump in Rust belt..

File: Capture.jpg (16KB, 257x231px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 257x231px

> yfw the 4th circuit court that overturned the ban is one of the most conservative in the country
> yfw the supreme court is much more liberal

You guys are going to chimp out so hard when scotus rules the ban is unconstitutional.

How does that expanded refugee program taste in the mean time?

you do realize it's still not going to be a muslim ban, right? drump's saudi masters will always be welcomed in the states.

>>128101266
>4th circuit
>conservative

Maybe once upon a time. Did you forget that Obama expanded the size of the 4th circuit so that he could appoint a ton of marxist judges to the empty slots he set up?

>>128090041
> THE MUSLIM BAN WAS LITERALLY ONLY 100 DAYS LONG
> THE MUSLIM BAN WAS LITERALLY ONLY 100 DAYS LONG
> THE MUSLIM BAN WAS LITERALLY ONLY 100 DAYS LONG
> THE MUSLIM BAN WAS LITERALLY ONLY 100 DAYS LONG

>>128092956
>this created "animus" toward Muslim AMERICANS and thus was a violation of the first amendment.

This is banana republic tier judicialism, where people just start fabricating stories wholesale in order to obtain a pre ordained verdict.

>>128101819
it's never too late to ban muslims anon

>>128091517
Great, but how is due process relevant to people who' e never set foot here?

>>128101857
We have the right to free speech, but this post hurt my feelings and created an animus towards me, so we're going to lock you up now :^)

>>128101819
Yes, it was a temporary measure. The original idea was "temporary moratorium so we can figure out what to do in the meantime for a more permanent solution"

Regardless, the ruling on this case would still set precedent for what is/isn't allowed in future bans. Hopefully this gets passed and Trump immediately enacts a more permanent EO mussie ban.

>>128098375
But can we go further?

>>128091913
& What race is he banning?

>>128101266
>>128101808
who appointed the 4th circuit judges? 1 by carter, 2 by reagan, 2 by H Bush, 3 by clinton and 1 marked as W Bush/Clinton, 3 by W Bush, 7 by Obama

so 11.5 (D) judges and 7.5 (R) Judges

>>128102668
> 7 by Obama
god damn didn't realize it was that many

>>128095779
Your gods the circuit court judges are frequently overruled

>>128102752
Yep, he introduced a lot of "vibrant diversity" to the 4th circuit court and turned it into another liberal zoo. Just like what he wants to do to america itself as a whole.

File: salt3.png (24KB, 764x706px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 764x706px

>>128090444
>There is literally no reason this doesn't get approved. I can't fucking wait for the salt.
checked and this
it's very straightforward legal.

>>128102967
>Yep, he introduced a lot of "vibrant diversity" to the 4th circuit court and turned it into another liberal zoo. Just like what he wants to do to america itself as a whole.
Yeah.. a lot of work to undo the mess he made. But we'll get there.

>>128090444
IT's in the bag with the new guy Trump elected

>>128095779
INCOMING PRECEDENT SET

>>128090041
Trump initiated this ban to have a litmus test on the Supreme Court. The delayed version of the second executive order was a way to keep the issue in the public eye long enough where it would not be ignored on the Supreme Court ruling.

The 9th circuit was idiotic for blocking the orders. They were too busy virtue signaling to realize that a ruling like this in the SCOTUS will send a very real message to Americans who do not fully believe our country has been subverted by communists. I cannot wait.

File: 1495063425968.jpg (180KB, 900x900px) Image search: [Google]

180KB, 900x900px

>before 1965, non whites were not allowed
>Founding Fathers amended immigration laws 3 times and not once made it so non whites could immigrate to america
>2017
>dude what the fuck banning non white countries from immigration is unconstitutional!!!!11!!!!

Why the fuck is this even a debate, if anything is unconstitutional it is the immigration law of 1965, which literally goes against everything which American was built upon, a melting pot of Europe and white countries, not of every shit street in India.

Quick Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_immigration_laws

>>128095779
>Banning muslims due to being muslim is a clear violation of the first amendment.
But that's not true retard it's a ban from countries who are mostly failed states who can't safely issue passports or visas because the government isn't functioning properly. Countries chosen by Obama, not Trump.

File: eJwNyEEOhCAMAMC_8AAKtBXwNwQJmqgQqCfj33fnOK96xqlWtYv0uQJsx8xtbHpKG6kWXVurZ0n9mDq3C5JIyvtVbplgDcUYvQvGL0iMROAWYuZAhtCb6JAdWApoif7H6HW_q_p-vuYidw.png (194KB, 424x433px) Image search: [Google]

194KB, 424x433px

>>128090041
>>128090444

ABOUT FUCKING TIME

YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS

>>128090041
So the US Muslim ban is actually going through? Fuck yes.